User talk:Michalis 9

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Nirmala Srivastava. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --Simon D M (talk) 16:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Sahaja Yoga appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. --Simon D M (talk) 14:11, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Nirmala Srivastava, as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see Help:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one (and vice versa) is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.' Thank you. --Simon D M (talk) 17:33, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete content from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Nirmala Srivastava, without explaining the reason for the removal in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. Unexplained or undiscussed mass removal of notable sourced content does not appear constructive, and your edit has been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox for test edits. Thank you. --Simon D M (talk) 17:30, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He explain each time why but you never read the edit summary field --Agenor 77 (talk) 12:45, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you look up the meaning of the word "and". --Simon D M (talk) 16:13, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Simon try and read the manual once more please. If i write in the edit summary i dont have to write to discussion page too.Michalis 9 (talk) 20:00, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary, the relevant page states: "Avoid using edit summaries to carry on debates or negotiation over the content or to express opinions of the other users involved. Instead, place such comments, if required, on the talk page. This keeps discussions and debates away from the article page itself." Perhaps you could let me know where you are getting your ideas of Wikipedia principles, policy and guidelines from. --Simon D M (talk) 21:33, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Debating is totally different from explaining the edit. I debate alright, but when i edit i add a summary. If that doesn't sparkle with you, sorry. Michalis 9 (talk) 22:18, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At the time the warning was issued you had made 6 deletions of large portions of notable sourced material from the page in question, but your only contribution to the talk page was this.--Simon D M (talk) 00:44, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, we remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Talk:Nirmala Srivastava. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --Simon D M (talk) 23:23, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]